Discuss the latest comic book news and front page articles, read or post your own reviews of comics, and talk about anything comic book related. Threads from the two subforums below will also show up here. News Stand topics can also be read and posted in from The Asylum.

The one true Batman is back and until he dies again in about seven years and Dick takes over the cowl again, I'll be very happy with this. This was a bit heavy with set-up but the final twist is a promise of good things to come. Snyder has not gone wrong with a Batman book yet and I don't see it happening now either.

The art was fine, enjoyable most of the time. I really thought the artist has a bit of an issue with the age differences between the Wayne boys but other than that it was enjoyable.

Story: 8Art: 8My Score: 8

Max Blyss wrote:Months and months and months and the whole thing is still just an intersection at Dipshit Lane & Chip on my Shoulder Ave.

I'll be blunt from the beginning. I expected better from this book, a lot better. While I wasn't very satisfied with the ending of Snyder's Detective Comics run with its rushed ending and inconsistent art, I attributed most of that to editorial constraints to meet the deadlines for this book...so regardless of my thoughts on the last issue I didn't blame Snyder.

Firstly, the opening scene is Arkham totally fell apart for me with the Joker moment despite the pretty cool moment of batman facing off against an army of his rogues gallery. That moment was just so contrived and the way it got strung along into the Batcave scene with Joker-style comments on Batman's brooding. It came across as way too forced just to build up the reveal. Moments like that are great for stories, but this one was far from it.

The rest of the issue seemed like by-the-book character building to establish the supporting cast of the Robin's, Jim Gordon and a few Gotham socialites along with what Bruce Wayne is doing these days. Not bad moments for spotlights, but not every gripping either.

Then the cliffhanger ending.....no, didn't do much for me either once I digested it and though about it for all of two seconds. This is the same Scott Snyder who delivered twist after turn on Detective Comics? He's now resorted to cheap shock cliffhangers like this? The writings not all that bad, Snyder's got a great grip on dialog and character moments...it's just that the storytelling in this book dropped the ball for me badly. Like I said earlier, everything reeked of being contrived to the point where my initial worries of Capullo drawing this book became equally divided into Snyder's writing.

Speaking of the art, never was a big fan of Capullo. In this issue he wasn't as bad as I remember for the most part. Sometimes his attention to detail with the settings was better than I ever remembered while at other times it would yo-yo to average to downright horrible moments like his take on Harvey Bullock. Very inconsistent...the coloring was well done though for what that's worth.

So in summary, I was really let down given how much good stuff Snyder has done recently. I guess DC is slowly burning him out with his massive workload.

I liked this issue a lot. It's certainly not the greatest Batman story ever, but it's a strong introductory issue. Snyder is a very efficient writer and in the opening fight scene shows us most of Batman's rogues gallery. In the next few pages, he shows us Batman's supporting cast. These scenes, while hardly heart-pounding, are necessary and handled as quickly as possible without coming off as rushed.

And the cliffhanger is awesome! It's the kinds of cliffhangers that we used to read every month in comics before they came to be dominated by lame, decompressed, 6- and 12-issue arcs. Yes, obviously, Dick is not going to turn out to be a psychopathic killer. But superhero comics have always placed the heroes under criminal suspicion ("Look, it's Superman robbing a bank") and then developed elaborate stories that show our heroes either duped or framed. If you don't like this kind of cliffhanger, then you should reevaluate your interest in superhero stories because this is one of the genre's most fun features.

The art and storytelling by Capullo are adequate, but a little too McFarlane-like for my taste. But the art isn't so bad that it detracts from the story.

Overall, this promises to be a fun Batman series. I will continue to read this book.

Punchy wrote:So last week's Criminal was bad because it used a common plot-device, but this week's Batman is good because it re-uses a common genre feature?

First, these two books are different genres, with different histories, associated expectations, and intended audiences. So comparing responses to Criminal (an adult noir book) and Batman (an all-ages superhero book) is inappropriate.

Second, Criminal's main problem was that the resolution was weak and rushed. The PI story was tacked on and went nowhere.

Eli Katz wrote:First, these two books are different genres, with different histories, associated expectations, and intended audiences. So comparing responses to Criminal (an adult noir book) and Batman (an all-ages superhero book) is inappropriate.

Second, Criminal's main problem was that the resolution was weak and rushed. The PI story was tacked on and went nowhere.

Britt Black P.I. clearly took the old dude's fifty grand and spent it on the breast implants he'd always dreamed of. He's called Brittany now.

Eli Katz wrote:First, these two books are different genres, with different histories, associated expectations, and intended audiences. So comparing responses to Criminal (an adult noir book) and Batman (an all-ages superhero book) is inappropriate.

Second, Criminal's main problem was that the resolution was weak and rushed. The PI story was tacked on and went nowhere.

Batman is not all-ages, it's rated T for Teen!

And I think you can compare them, an overused plot-point is an overused plot-point, why should we be more accepting of them in superhero titles? Doesn't that demean the genre?

And I think you can compare them, an overused plot-point is an overused plot-point, why should we be more accepting of them in superhero titles? Doesn't that demean the genre?

Here's the difference:

We know that Bru employs the overused plotline to provide a quick, overly neat ending to his story; he does not innovate the explanation of the fake serial killer in any way. By contrast, we don't know yet how Snyder is going to use the good-guy-turns-bad cliche. If he uses it simply for a cheap cliffhanger, fine, then he will have developed an overly conventional plotline and in turn will deserve our ridicule. But if the story of Dick's apparent criminality is explored in an interesting and unexpected way, then we can celebrate it as yet another excellent Snyder story.

Because Criminal #4 is the final issue of an arc, we can assess the issue and the story in great depth. Conversely, because this is the first issue of a completely new DC Universe, we can assess only this issue and its story promises. So far, as far as I'm concerned, the book is interesting enough to continue reading the series. And the cliffhanger, while it follows genre conventions, does not necessarily promise a conventional storyline.

Once this Batman arc ends and we see the full story, then we'll be able to see if Snyder innovates or relies on cliche.